Firefox ad-blocker extension causes angst

[Sharktooth]

A Web site owner has blocked Firefox users from accessing his site in protest of a popular browser extension that blocks text and display ads.

Read more (http://www.driverheaven.net/news/144336-firefox-ad-blocker-extension-causes-angst.html)


IMHO he should block IE and Opera and all browsers derived from those ones, coz, like Firefox, they have content filtering too...
So, dear Jack Lewis, keeping your blog for yourself should be the smarter choice.

[Nick]

This was posted in the News forum.
Whether it's really on topic enough to be newsworthy in a mainly digital video forum, is debatable IMO.

However, since there is an aspect of IP rights and revenue control, it is not entirely off topic either, so I've moved it to general discussion.

[mitsubishi]

LOL.

Well adverts form a large part of the internet economy, so he has something of a point.

The issue for me is consent. If you visit a site, you cannot know what is on it before you get there, so by clicking a link or tapping in an address, what is it that you are implicitly agreeing to being shown? I will not tolerate adverts which use excessive amounts of bandwidth, by showing video etc, without asking, or my personal least favourite sounds.

This is why I run adblocker, but do not load in the available block lists. I only block the advertiser (meaning the whole domain) when I feel they have overstepped the mark, so one unrequested video, annoying sound or excessively CPU demanding flash ad gets the domain banned.

[communist]

Big deal.. I couldn care less.
While blanket ad blocking in general is still theft (...)
Riiiiiight!

If every major news site (which has ads too) did this then it would be a slight annoyance but there are plenty of ways to get around it.. squid + adzapper comes to my mind.

I just hope it doesnt lead to sites requiring a certified platform to be displayed.. say "protected web path" :sly:

[Sharktooth]

Advertising is just a way to annoy ppl. Ppl like Lewis must understand if he hasnt money to run a website then he cant run a website...

[Shinigami-Sama]

do we as web users have a place to complain about this(other than anonymous )?
I know we have place for non-RFC compliance I was just looking at it...

[HyperHacker]

Nice thing about Firefox, you can just install an extension like User Agent Switcher and pretend to be some other browser. :)

[edit] Actually, this site seems to have three different layers of "protection". #1 is user-agent checking. #2 is Javascript; any browser not supporting document.all (which, AFAIK, is an IE-only nonstandard thing) gets redirected, and it shows an error message if it can't find the ads. #3 is a meta redirect, that if Javascript is off, redirects you to a page saying "This site requires JavaScript.". Of course, this being a form of DRM, it kills usability and is easily defeated:
1) Set your user agent to Opera or some other browser.
2) Turn off Javascript.
3) As the page is loading, hold End to scroll down. Mash Escape when you see "Copyright AdLogger, AdSense Tracking.". Wait a second, the status bar should change, mash it again to prevent the redirect. Or, use Proxomitron to strip it out or install an extension that disables meta redirect. (This seems to stop the ads from loading too. Ha!)

http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/5156/jacklewisownedpe0.th.jpg (http://img54.imageshack.us/my.php?image=jacklewisownedpe0.jpg)

BTW, to web designers, here's a better way to stop people from blocking your ads: Don't use annoying ads. :)

(Yeah, I enjoy finding ways around DRM, and I was bored. :p)

[Atak_Snajpera]

Does anybody know how to block particular flash ads? I hate when some flash ads cover half screen :(

[LoRd_MuldeR]

Does anybody know how to block particular flash ads? I hate when some flash ads cover half screen :(

Use Firefox or SeaMonkey and install Adblock Plus + NoScript :)

[Sharktooth]

...or use the "Block content..." feature in Opera.

[HyperHacker]

Use Firefox or SeaMonkey and install Adblock Plus + NoScript :)Or FlashBlock, which prevents the Flash from starting until you click it.

[joseph5]

The website also blocks the SeaMonkey browser.

[noclip]

Maybe they will start blocking all users of Windows and *nix-based OSes because they have host files which can be edited to forward known ad servers to localhost.

Also, here's a crazy idea for people like this guy to chew on: I'm not hiding your ads because I'm afraid I'll be lured into clicking one, I am hiding them because they slow down page load times. I haven't clicked on an ad since the late 1990s and I don't intend to start any time soon, not least on your crappy blog.

[HyperHacker]

I block ads either because they're slow to load or because they're obnoxious and annoying. I think most others do the same. There's a reason Google ads are blocked on a per-site basis.

[Sharktooth]

ahahah totally pwned!
http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/8194/jackidiotji1.th.jpg (http://img172.imageshack.us/my.php?image=jackidiotji1.jpg)
someone completely removed everything except the blog contents and the banner on top

[Waleska]

http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/3127/clipboard02xc5.th.png (http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/3127/clipboard02xc5.png)

He seems to be blocking everything but IE. The workaround for Opera consists in disabling JavaScript and Automatic Redirection (which won't cripple the functionality of this particular site), and since you can have a different set of parameters for every site you visit by simply using the "Edit site preferences..." option, browsing other sites at the same time with those 2 babies enabled, won't have any affect on http://jacklewis.net/weblog/

One less to go :cool:

[HyperHacker]

Actual ad banners now, rather than Google ads? It's like he wants people to block them.

Anyway my method should still work if you set the user-agent to IE, I can't be arsed to test it right now though. :-p

Though it's funny to think how well this is working out for him. Look at all the attention it's drawing. Even if the majority of it is from people using Adblock, there's probably still a good few that don't.

[Sharktooth]

right. however im moving to legally take down the whyfirefoxisblocked.com domain and ensure the resposible of this discrimination of the free software gets sued as well...

[Tack]

right. however im moving to legally take down the whyfirefoxisblocked.com domain and ensure the resposible of this discrimination of the free software gets sued as well...Under which statute?

I really don't see any legal recourse here. Nor do I believe there should be. If sites wish to prevent me from viewing them, fine. I will go elsewhere. Nothing they say is that important to me.

[Sharktooth]

im getting informed on the U.S. antitrust laws...

[Tack]

I think it would be far more interesting -- not to mention easier and cheaper than legal recourse (of which I strongly doubt there is any) -- to develop and popularize an ad blocker for IE, and then see what this guy does.

[Sharktooth]

http://www.ie7pro.com/ad-blocker.html
the other adblockers seems to be all payware

[Sharktooth]

ah.. he's blocking ie7pro adblocker too

[Revgen]

"Accessing the content while blocking the ads therefore would be no less than stealing,"

Well, then I guess whenever I change the channel when a commercial comes on, I must be stealing TV shows. :rolleyes:

All the guy does is run a political blog. He's practically advertising for political candidates and their issues.

[joseph5]

He seems to be blocking everything but IE.Maybe he works for Microsoft?

[Sharktooth]

No. he blocks IE too if any adblocker is installed.

[HyperHacker]

If you look at the script, it redirects if the Google ad frame is missing. Or at least that's what it was doing last I checked.

[Waleska]

right. however im moving to legally take down the whyfirefoxisblocked.com domain and ensure the resposible of this discrimination of the free software gets sued as well...

Ever been to downtown Stoptakingoffesnsefromwhatyoudontagreewithandgetalife?.

[Sharktooth]

no? i already have a life and in my free time i like to have fun kicking ppl like him the a$$...

[Waleska]

no? i already have a life and in my free time i like to have fun kicking ppl like him the a$$...

100 bucks that site is there by the end of the month.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPhje8wepyg

[Sharktooth]

im still documenting myself on U.S. laws....

[feedback]

I hardly watch TV anymore (I do watch DVD's) because I feel like I have just invited a salesman into my home with all the
nonstop BUY!, BUY!, BUY! :eek: I am subjected to (I don't TIVO).

As such, I hate to be subjected to advertising when surfing the internet, so I love firefox and adBlock Plus .

Also, if Sharktooth can cause this guy a problem, then I am all for it.

[Sharktooth]

not to jack lewis...but they guy behind whyfirefoxisblocked.com (the domain was registered using a proxy).
however i think it will be better if i contact the FSF for this kind of problems.

[foxyshadis]

I'm afraid you won't find anything outlawing being a git or mandating that all personal sites must have universal access of any kind. Everyone has the right to discriminate however they want, whether it's against free software, DRM, or Jews, on their own websites. (The hosting company that owns the servers still has the right to limit what you say though.) Fortunately, you won't find laws against vague unsupportable threats on internet forums, either, or half of us would be locked up. =p

Isn't what you want to do even more churlish than what he's doing?

[Sharktooth]

.....

[noclip]

All this controversy only serves to give the guy free publicity for his shitty blog. It's genius marketing.

[Sharktooth]

well, it doesnt matter... he must pay the bills too, so maybe i'll have to just leave a permanent open tab with a 5 secs refresh on his stupid blog filtering ads so i will compensate for all the idiots surfing his website and getting the ads spammed on their face... :D
using Tor may be a good idea too... ;)